Electric field and electric potential exercise

In summary, Gauss' Law is useful for finding E in certain circumstances, but it is useful for finding fluxes in all circumstances. So you can definitely use it in part d).In summary, Gauss' Law can be used to find the flux through a surface, regardless of whether or not the electric field is constant. In this case, the flux can be found by finding the charge enclosed within the surface and dividing it by the permittivity of free space.
  • #1
Guillem_dlc
184
15
Homework Statement
Consider a very large flat surface located in the plane [itex]z = 0[/itex] that is uniformly loaded with a density [itex]\sigma =3\, \textrm{nC/m}^2[/itex]. Consider also a point charge [itex]q=100\, \textrm{pC}[/itex] located at point [itex](0,0,20)\, \textrm{cm}[/itex].
a) What force acts on the charge [itex]q[/itex]?
b) What is the flux of the electric field through a spherical surface of [itex]10\, \textrm{cm}[/itex]-radius centered on the coordinate origin?
c) What force would act on a point charge [itex]Q=-200\, \textrm{pC}[/itex] if we placed it at point [itex](0,5,20)\, \textrm{cm}[/itex]?
d) In the situation of the previous section, what would be the flux of the electric field through a spherical surface of [itex]10\, \textrm{cm}[/itex] radius centered on the charge [itex]Q[/itex]?
Relevant Equations
[tex] \vec{F}=\vec{E}\cdot q[/tex]
[tex] \phi =\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}[/tex]
a)
D3F6529A-2AA2-4BB2-B896-1E8D96693A08.jpeg

[tex] \vec{F}=\vec{E}\cdot q [/tex]
[tex] \phi =\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}=\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}=\underbrace{\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}}_{\textrm{FACES } \perp}+\underbrace{\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}}_{\textrm{FACES } \parallel}=0+\oint EdS\cdot \underbrace{\cos 0}_1= E2S[/tex]
[tex] \dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=\phi [/tex]
[tex]
\left.
\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=E2S \atop
\sigma =\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{S}
\right\} \quad \sigma S=E2S\varepsilon_0 \rightarrow E=\dfrac{\sigma}{2\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{3\cdot 10^{-9}}{2\cdot 8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}=169'49\, \widehat{k}\, \textrm{N/C}
[/tex]
[tex] \vec{F}=\dfrac{\sigma}{2\varepsilon_0}\cdot q=\dfrac{3\cdot 10^{-9}}{2\cdot 8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}\cdot 1\cdot 10^{-10}=1'69\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{N}\rightarrow \boxed{\vec{F}=17\widehat{k}\, \textrm{nN}} [/tex]

b)
E1B4E73D-5773-4FAD-BEDD-A821A520A349.jpeg

[tex] \phi =\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{\pi \cdot R^2\sigma}{\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{\pi \cdot 0'1^2\cdot 3\cdot 10^{-9}}{8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}=\boxed{10'65\, \textrm{Nm}^2/\textrm{C}} [/tex]

c) [tex] Q=-200\, \textrm{pC}=-2\cdot 10^{-10}\, \textrm{C}\quad P_Q=(0,0'05,0'2)\, \textrm{m}\quad P_q=(0,0,0'2)\, \textrm{m} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{E}=169'49\, \widehat{k} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{F_E}=Q\cdot E=-2\cdot 10^{-10}\cdot 169'49\, \widehat{k}=-3'39\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{C}\, \widehat{k} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{r_{Q\to q}}=(0,0'05,0'2)-(0,0,0'2)=(0,0'05,0) [/tex]
[tex] \vec{F_q}=k\cdot \dfrac{Q\cdot q}{r^3}\vec{r_{Q\to q}}=9\cdot 10^9\cdot \dfrac{(-2\cdot 10^{-10})\cdot 1\cdot 10^{-10}}{0'05^3}\cdot (0,0'05,0)=-7'2\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{C}\, \widehat{j} [/tex]
[tex] \boxed{\vec{F}=(-72\, \widehat{j}-34\, \widehat{k})\, \textrm{nN}} [/tex]

d) [tex]
\left.
\vec{E}=169'49\, \widehat{k} \atop
\vec{E_q}=k\cdot \dfrac{q}{r^3}\vec{r_{Q\to q}}=9\cdot 10^9\cdot \dfrac{1\cdot 10^{-10}}{0'05^3}(0,0'05,0)=360\, \widehat{j}
\right\} \vec{E_T}=(360\, \widehat{j}+169'49\, \widehat{k})\, \textrm{N/C}
[/tex]How would section (d) of this question be calculated?
In section (b) I have applied Gauss law since I could calculate the internal charge of the spherical surface.
It is the one I've made so far. The problem I see is that I can't apply Gauss. But I also don't know the relationship between the direction of the surface differential and the direction of the electric field.

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Guillem_dlc said:
Homework Statement:: Consider a very large flat surface located in the plane [itex]z = 0[/itex] that is uniformly loaded with a density [itex]\sigma =3\, \textrm{nC/m}^2[/itex]. Consider also a point charge [itex]q=100\, \textrm{pC}[/itex] located at point [itex](0,0,20)\, \textrm{cm}[/itex].
a) What force acts on the charge [itex]q[/itex]?
b) What is the flux of the electric field through a spherical surface of [itex]10\, \textrm{cm}[/itex]-radius centered on the coordinate origin?
c) What force would act on a point charge [itex]Q=-200\, \textrm{pC}[/itex] if we placed it at point [itex](0,5,20)\, \textrm{cm}[/itex]?
d) In the situation of the previous section, what would be the flux of the electric field through a spherical surface of [itex]10\, \textrm{cm}[/itex] radius centered on the charge [itex]Q[/itex]?
Relevant Equations:: [tex] \vec{F}=\vec{E}\cdot q[/tex]
[tex] \phi =\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}[/tex]

a) View attachment 262684
[tex] \vec{F}=\vec{E}\cdot q [/tex]
[tex] \phi =\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}=\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}=\underbrace{\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}}_{\textrm{FACES } \perp}+\underbrace{\oint \vec{E}d\vec{S}}_{\textrm{FACES } \parallel}=0+\oint EdS\cdot \underbrace{\cos 0}_1= E2S[/tex]
[tex] \dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=\phi [/tex]
[tex]
\left.
\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=E2S \atop
\sigma =\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{S}
\right\} \quad \sigma S=E2S\varepsilon_0 \rightarrow E=\dfrac{\sigma}{2\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{3\cdot 10^{-9}}{2\cdot 8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}=169'49\, \widehat{k}\, \textrm{N/C}
[/tex]
[tex] \vec{F}=\dfrac{\sigma}{2\varepsilon_0}\cdot q=\dfrac{3\cdot 10^{-9}}{2\cdot 8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}\cdot 1\cdot 10^{-10}=1'69\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{N}\rightarrow \boxed{\vec{F}=17\widehat{k}\, \textrm{nN}} [/tex]

b) View attachment 262685
[tex] \phi =\dfrac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{\pi \cdot R^2\sigma}{\varepsilon_0}=\dfrac{\pi \cdot 0'1^2\cdot 3\cdot 10^{-9}}{8'85\cdot 10^{-12}}=\boxed{10'65\, \textrm{Nm}^2/\textrm{C}} [/tex]

c) [tex] Q=-200\, \textrm{pC}=-2\cdot 10^{-10}\, \textrm{C}\quad P_Q=(0,0'05,0'2)\, \textrm{m}\quad P_q=(0,0,0'2)\, \textrm{m} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{E}=169'49\, \widehat{k} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{F_E}=Q\cdot E=-2\cdot 10^{-10}\cdot 169'49\, \widehat{k}=-3'39\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{C}\, \widehat{k} [/tex]
[tex] \vec{r_{Q\to q}}=(0,0'05,0'2)-(0,0,0'2)=(0,0'05,0) [/tex]
[tex] \vec{F_q}=k\cdot \dfrac{Q\cdot q}{r^3}\vec{r_{Q\to q}}=9\cdot 10^9\cdot \dfrac{(-2\cdot 10^{-10})\cdot 1\cdot 10^{-10}}{0'05^3}\cdot (0,0'05,0)=-7'2\cdot 10^{-8}\, \textrm{C}\, \widehat{j} [/tex]
[tex] \boxed{\vec{F}=(-72\, \widehat{j}-34\, \widehat{k})\, \textrm{nN}} [/tex]

d) [tex]
\left.
\vec{E}=169'49\, \widehat{k} \atop
\vec{E_q}=k\cdot \dfrac{q}{r^3}\vec{r_{Q\to q}}=9\cdot 10^9\cdot \dfrac{1\cdot 10^{-10}}{0'05^3}(0,0'05,0)=360\, \widehat{j}
\right\} \vec{E_T}=(360\, \widehat{j}+169'49\, \widehat{k})\, \textrm{N/C}
[/tex]How would section (d) of this question be calculated?
In section (b) I have applied Gauss law since I could calculate the internal charge of the spherical surface.
It is the one I've made so far. The problem I see is that I can't apply Gauss. But I also don't know the relationship between the direction of the surface differential and the direction of the electric field.

Thanks!
Parts a) through c) look good to me. :smile:

For part d) you can apply Gauss' Law just fine. The problem statement isn't asking for [itex] \vec E [/itex], it's asking for the flux [itex] \phi [/itex].

You are correct that Gauss's Law is not very useful in finding [itex] \vec E [/itex], except in certain situations where symmetry is present, such as a spherically symetrical charge, an infinitely long wire with cylindical charge symmetry, or an infinite plane with uniform charge -- and all assuming that there are no other charges around. That's because only in those special cases is [itex] |\vec E| [/itex] constant. So for the situation described in part d), you won't be able rely on Guass' Law to simply derive [itex] \vec E [/itex]. But part d) of this problem is not asking you to find [itex] \vec E [/itex].

This problem (part d) is asking you to find the flux. Gauss' Law always holds true whether or not [itex] E [/itex] across the surface is constant or not. The total flux is proportional to the charge enclosed. Always. [Edit: just make sure to properly account for all the charge enclosed within the surface.]

(Gauss's law is one of Maxwell's Equations, after all. And in classical electrodynamics it always holds true. Always.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #3
collinsmark said:
Parts a) through c) look good to me. :smile:

For part d) you can apply Gauss' Law just fine. The problem statement isn't asking for [itex] \vec E [/itex], it's asking for the flux [itex] \phi [/itex].

You are correct that Gauss's Law is not very useful in finding [itex] \vec E [/itex], except in certain situations where symmetry is present, such as a spherically symetrical charge, an infinitely long wire with cylindical charge symmetry, or an infinite plane with uniform charge -- and all assuming that there are no other charges around. That's because only in those special cases is [itex] |\vec E| [/itex] constant. So for the situation described in part d), you won't be able rely on Guass' Law to simply derive [itex] \vec E [/itex]. But part d) of this problem is not asking you to find [itex] \vec E [/itex].

This problem (part d) is asking you to find the flux. Gauss' Law always holds true whether or not [itex] E [/itex] across the surface is constant or not. The total flux is proportional to the charge enclosed. Always. [Edit: just make sure to properly account for all the charge enclosed within the surface.]

(Gauss's law is one of Maxwell's Equations, after all. And in classical electrodynamics it always holds true. Always.)
Aa okay, that is even if it is not constant you know that it will surely be proportional because it must always be a multiple of the elementary charge, the electron. Right?
 
  • #4
Guillem_dlc said:
Aa okay, that is even if it is not constant you know that it will surely be proportional because it must always be a multiple of the elementary charge, the electron. Right?
Not sure what you trying to say here, but I think @collinsmark meant that when symmetry is present, ##|\vec{E}|## is constant throughout the surface in which we calculate the integral of gauss's law.

For example we have a point charge q . Let's choose as gaussian surface a spherical surface of radius ##R##, centered at the point charge. Then the magnitude of the electric field throughout this spherical surface is constant and equal to ##k\frac{q}{R^2}##. It isn't constant in all the space around the point charge.
 
  • Like
Likes collinsmark
  • #5
Guillem_dlc said:
Aa okay, that is even if it is not constant you know that it will surely be proportional because it must always be a multiple of the elementary charge, the electron. Right?
It doesn't have to do with a multiple of the elementary charge per se (not in classical electrodynamics anyway). Gauss' Law was around long before the electron was discovered.

Before you answer part d), it might help to put Gauss' Law into words. Give it a try, but to do so by keeping it simple, without using too many mathematics terms. Try not to use words like "integral." And don't worry much about [itex] \varepsilon_0 [/itex] -- that's just a constant of proportionality and is not of particular importance for this.

[tex] \oint \vec E \cdot \vec {dS} = \frac{Q_{enc}}{\varepsilon_0} [/tex]

Also, you know that (using the above notation) that for the closed surface [itex] S [/itex], the flux is [itex] \phi = \oint \vec E \cdot \vec {dS} [/itex]. Also note that [itex] S [/itex] can be any closed surface. It doesn't have to be a sphere, or a cylinder, or pillbox. It can be anything. It can even be in the shape of some weird amorphous blob, so long as it is a closed surface.

So in simple terms, what is Gauss' Law really saying?

[Edit: it's totally ok here to use terms like "electric field lines," or "lines of flux," or somesuch, if you wish.]
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Delta2 said:
For example we have a point charge q . Let's choose as gaussian surface a spherical surface of radius ##R##, centered at the point charge. Then the magnitude of the electric field throughout this spherical surface is constant and equal to ##k\frac{q}{R^2}##. It isn't constant in all the space around the point charge.
Exactly, perfect.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #7
collinsmark said:
Before you answer part d), it might help to put Gauss' Law into words. Give it a try, but to do so by keeping it simple, without using too many mathematics terms. Try not to use words like "integral." And don't worry much about [itex] \varepsilon_0 [/itex] -- that's just a constant of proportionality and is not of particular importance for this.
Okay, perfect.
collinsmark said:
So in simple terms, what is Gauss' Law really saying?
Gauss law would say that the charge inside a closed surface (which can take any shape) is proportional to the flux through it, wouldn't it?
 
  • #8
Guillem_dlc said:
Okay, perfect.

Gauss law would say that the charge inside a closed surface (which can take any shape) is proportional to the flux through it, wouldn't it?
Yes! :biggrin:

And there are some other things that go with this. One of which we already established:
  • It doesn't say anything about the shape of the surface. The total flux through the closed surface is only depended upon the charge within that surface. The shape of the surface is irrelevant, so long as the intricacies of the surface's shape do not effect the total charge enclosed within.
  • Nothing outside the surface affects the total flux through the surface. When determining the total flux through the closed surface, the only charges that matter are those within the surface. Those things outside the surface don't matter.
  • For those charges that are inside the closed surface, it doesn't matter where they are inside the surface when determining the total flux through the surface. You can move charges around inside the surface all day, so long as no charges go from inside to outside the surface (or vice-versa); but the total flux through the surface will not change.
You should now have all you need to complete part d)*. :smile:

*(For future reference, keep in mind that Gauss's Law only makes claims about the total flux through a closed surface. Moving charges around inside the surface or outside the surface, can change the electric field and flux through small sections of the surface -- it's just that they don't effect the total flux through the closed surface. E.g., moving a charge within the surface will increase the flux in some part of the surface, but it also will decrease the flux in other parts of the surface, and thus the total flux through the overall closed doesn't change. That's Gauss' Law.)
 
  • Like
Likes Guillem_dlc, Delta2 and etotheipi

1. What is an electric field?

An electric field is a region in space where an electric charge experiences a force. It is created by electric charges and is represented by lines of force that point in the direction of the force acting on a positive charge.

2. How is electric field strength calculated?

Electric field strength is calculated by dividing the force exerted on a charge by the magnitude of the charge. It is measured in newtons per coulomb (N/C).

3. What is the relationship between electric field and electric potential?

Electric potential is a measure of the potential energy of an electric charge at a certain point in an electric field. The strength of an electric field is directly proportional to the electric potential at that point.

4. How is electric potential difference related to work done?

Electric potential difference is the change in electric potential between two points in an electric field. The work done in moving a charge between these two points is equal to the product of the charge and the electric potential difference.

5. Can electric potential be negative?

Yes, electric potential can be negative. This indicates that the electric field is doing work on the charge, causing it to lose potential energy. A positive electric potential indicates that the charge is gaining potential energy as it moves in the direction of the electric field.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
911
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
895
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
880
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
980
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
980
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
400
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
752
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top